CVE-2025-47241VulnerabilityPublished 5 May 2025Updated 27 Oct 2026

Browser Use allows bypassing `allowed_domains` by putting a decoy domain in http auth username portion of a URL

Affects browser-useSource GCVE Database

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.3 Critical : upgrade to 0.1.45 as a priority.

Data as of 27 Oct 2026, 17:11 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.3Critical

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 39% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.1.45

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: None
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 May 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade browser-use to 0.1.45.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
PyPIbrowser-use	Affected <0.1.45	Fixed in 0.1.45

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

Description

### Summary During a manual source code review, [**ARIMLABS.AI**](https://arimlabs.ai) researchers identified that the `browser_use` module includes an embedded whitelist functionality to restrict URLs that can be visited. This restriction is enforced during agent initialization. However, it was discovered that these measures can be bypassed, leading to severe security implications. ### Details **File:** `browser_use/browser/context.py` The `BrowserContextConfig` class defines an `allowed_domains` list, which is intended to limit accessible domains. This list is checked in the `_is_url_allowed()` method before navigation: ```python @dataclass class BrowserContextConfig: """ [STRIPPED] """ cookies_file: str | None = None minimum_wait_page_load_time: float = 0.5 wait_for_network_idle_page_load_time: float = 1 maximum_wait_page_load_time: float = 5 wait_between_actions: float = 1 disable_security: bool = True browser_window_size: BrowserContextWindowSize = field(default_factory=lambda: {'width': 1280, 'height': 1100}) no_viewport: Optional[bool] = None save_recording_path: str | None = None save_downloads_path: str | None = None trace_path: str | None = None locale: str | None = None user_agent: str = ( 'Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/85.0.4183.102 Safari/537.36' ) highlight_elements: bool = True viewport_expansion: int = 500 allowed_domains: list[str] | None = None include_dynamic_attributes: bool = True _force_keep_context_alive: bool = False ``` The _is_url_allowed() method is responsible for checking whether a given URL is permitted: ```python def _is_url_allowed(self, url: str) -> bool: """Check if a URL is allowed based on the whitelist configuration.""" if not self.config.allowed_domains: return True try: from urllib.parse import urlparse parsed_url = urlparse(url) domain = parsed_url.netloc.lower() # Remove port number if present if ':' in domain: domain = domain.split(':')[0] # Check if domain matches any allowed domain pattern return any( domain == allowed_domain.lower() or domain.endswith('.' + allowed_domain.lower()) for allowed_domain in self.config.allowed_domains ) except Exception as e: logger.error(f'Error checking URL allowlist: {str(e)}') return False ``` The core issue stems from the line `domain = domain.split(':')[0]`, which allows an attacker to manipulate basic authentication credentials by providing a username:password pair. By replacing the username with a whitelisted domain, the check can be bypassed, even though the actual domain remains different. ### Proof of Concept (PoC) Set allowed_domains to ['example.com'] and use the following URL: https://example.com:pass@localhost:8080 This allows bypassing all whitelist controls and accessing restricted internal services. ### Impact - Affected all users relying on this functionality for security. - Potential for unauthorized enumeration of localhost services and internal networks. - Ability to bypass domain whitelisting, leading to unauthorized browsing.

CWE-647Use of Non-Canonical URL Paths for Authorization Decisions (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product defines policy namespaces and makes authorization decisions based on the assumption that a URL is canonical. This can allow a non-canonical URL to bypass the authorization.
Architecture and Design
Make access control policy based on path information in canonical form. Use very restrictive regular expressions to validate that the path is in the expected form.
Architecture and Design
Reject all alternate path encodings that are not in the expected canonical form.
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

WeaknessesCWE-647

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats